Draginol Draginol

Government as a neighborhood association

▼

Government as a neighborhood association

from JoeUser Forums

imageThe biggest reason the left and the right of American politics fight on issues of social policy has to do with the diverging views of what the role of the federal government is.

To the right, the federal government is analogous to a neighborhood association (NA). In a NA, the residents get together and vote on common rules for everyone to follow as well as an association fee that each neighbor has to pay in to the general fund to pay for things such as trash pickup, snow removal, lawn car and common area maintenance.

One could not imagine anyone in a NA begin to suggest that the NA start also paying for individual health insurance or that how much we pay in should be based on how much we make. But there is nothing actually preventing that from happening. It's only that such an idea is preposterous and would result in the wealthiest residents moving.

The book Atlas Shrugged works on a similar premise. What if the people who make all the money simply went on strike? What if they simply stopped producing and went away? The book shows how society, as we know it, would soon collapse.

That's because, in the real world, in any random group of people, a tiny handful produce most of the results for the rest. This is true whether you're talking about a small project or even in a given neighborhood where most of the work is done by the same few people over and over again.

When the far-left clamors for the government (the ultimate neighborhood association) to provide more and more benefits to individuals, they are hijacking the original intent of the founding fathers. Someone who argues that a politician who votes against expanded benefits for individuals is somehow a "Scrooge" has a fundamental misunderstanding of what the purpose of government is.

Which brings us back to our neighborhood association. If your neighborhood association began to try to force the most productive members of the neighborhood to provide disproportionately more to the neighborhood than what they receive in return what do you think would be the result?

politics
12,828 views 31 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Your usage of the term seems to imply that only the federal government of the United States can do the things you wish to have occur in "the nation".
End of quote


I think you GOT it. and yes, there are few IMPORTANT and VITAL things only a Gov can do to ensure that the wellbeing and progress of ALL its citizens are being carried out properly. Examples: proper education in ALL States in order to maintain a level playing field for all globally, Sound energy policy to ensure independence from foreign influence, Sound fiscal policies in order to protect people from greedy unethical interests (regardless of the foolishness of some people and some businesses), Sound Environmental policies to ensure proper management of natural resources without adverse effects on people and resources, ... and many many more things the NA can never be able to take responsibility for.

have you noticed that the Gov just issued (today) new rules and guidelines to avoid another subprime loan's disaster. ..... Why wasnt that issued 3 yrs ago when many many warnings were issued but the Feds and the SEC ignored .... until it is too late .....

Greenspan, the hypocrite, kept saying no problem till the collapse was happening already .... how nice of him and of the SEC. where were they when they ignored all the warnings and the signs of the looming disaster?????

NA's are no where have that responsibilities and a collection of neighbohoods are no where near forming a nation.

You know something, a Nation is like one of your Bee Hives. A hive is not just a collection of Bees living on several plates next to each other. It is much more than that. I am certain that you can see that for yourself.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
What are you talking about? What control do you suppose people like me want over you?
End of quote


Not you Draginol, the people who support unauthorized spying on citizens, the people who support take-over of small private properties for the benefit of a major private commercial project, people who support laws to manipulate federal spending in a way that affects private affairs of citizens, people who support signing statements that expand executive power beyond all normal limits (sometimes even beyond existing laws) .... etc. that is what i am talking about.
DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thanks for taking the time.
They would be replaced very quickly, guaranteed.


By whom?

Or do you view people like Bill Gates or Henry Ford as merely hogging all the wealth and largely disposable? My answer: Everyone is replaceable.

As a practical reality, only a tiny % of the population is willing and capable of building a successful enterprise.

But if you think it's a trivial matter, why aren't you rich, Iben? Just staying back out of politeness? My answer: How rich would I need to be to make you happy?

I am thinking about the questions you asked me.
I have a question for you.
Why are you willing to build a successful enterprise?
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top

I have a question for you.
Why are you willing to build a successful enterprise?
End of quote

Because my overall life objectives require it and I enjoy doing it.

As for your question "how rich would I need to be to make you happy"

What I was responding to was your assertion that the most productive people in society would be easily replaced "garaunteed".  So my question is, where are these replacements right now? What have you produced that is particularly notable in society? Have you founded your own company employing dozens of employees? And if not, why not? If you think it's so easy that the people who do it can be replaced easily, why haven't you already done so?

Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you think it's so easy that the people who do it can be replaced easily, why haven't you already done so?
End of quote


One word - Responsibility. Productive people also have a lot of responsibility, and while many would love the fame and fortune of being one of the "producers", most run away when the responsibilities of the job are also included. Some dont want it, and more still just cant handle it.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

That's a good point. I know plenty of people who can be barely bothered to show up on time every day to work.

By contrast, I know people who are basically on call 24 7 on very important projects that only they can do.

So it's not surprising that the former is paid upwards to 10 times as much as the latter.